ArticleBiology of sport2026
Sex differences in hip and groin injury prevalence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 3133 team-sport athletes.
Article in Biology of sport, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the prevalence of hip and groin injuries (HGIs) among male and female athletes. Systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic search for related studies published from inception to February 2025 was conducted using the following databases: Cochrane, PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, SPORTDiscus, PEDro and Scopus. A total of nine clinical trials, cohort or case-control studies were included. Data recorded from each study included authors, year of publication, study design, number of participants, sport played, age, number of injured athletes, injury prevalence, and type of injury (time-loss (TL) and/or non-time-loss (NTL)). Pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. The risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated with the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. The pooled results of 3133 athletes (1955 males and 1178 females) showed no differences in HGIs between both sexes with an OR of 1.39 (95% CI: 0.99-1.96; PI: 0.48-3.99; p = 0.06). No differences were observed for TL (OR = 1.55) and NTL (OR = 0.97) injuries. Male football players showed higher odds of suffering groin problems (OR = 2.25). This systematic review and meta-analysis reveal a similar prevalence of HGIs in both males and females. The results highlight the importance of establishing screening measures for all athletes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.